Breeders' Cup Match Race

[RacingFan1992]

Could you imagine if the Breeders' Cup hosted an event where two horse could duke it out. Two horses such as California Chrome and Tonalist instead of being entered in the Classic, they are entered in the match race. Just a wild idea and even crazier if it happened. I don't support match races just thought the crazy people at the BC might do something like this to attract more fans. "The Derby, Preakness winner battles with the Belmont winner who cost him the crown." :rolleyes:

[OTM Al]

Ummm. No.

[nijinski]

I prefer a full field !

[notoutofpounds]

Boooooooooooooo !!!! :ThmbDown: :ThmbDown: not :2b:

[horses4courses]

Ummm. No.

Nice to romanticize about the Seabiscuit/War Admiral era,
but those days are gone, and won't be back for the sport.

The thought of 2 marquee horses skipping the BC Classic
to take on each other in a match race is pure fantasy.

Ain't gonna happen..... :ThmbDown:

[Tom]

Best we can hope for is Calvin to pop some jock at the scales.

[Frost king]

The last time we had a match race, it cost Ruffian her life. Since that day, the industry has had no appetite for it.

[OTM Al]

The last time we had a match race, it cost Ruffian her life. Since that day, the industry has had no appetite for it.

Not remotely true on either count.

[Stillriledup]

Ummm. No.

Why is it a bad idea? Seems exciting to me.

[Stillriledup]

The last time we had a match race, it cost Ruffian her life. Since that day, the industry has had no appetite for it.

But she didn't die because of the match race. She could have just as easily broken down in a 10 horse field.

[letswastemoney]

Match races aren't fun for bettors, even if they are safe.

I think most would rather have a race that can be bet on, and match races take all the fun out of that by having only two options at extremely short odds.

[Stillriledup]

Match races aren't fun for bettors, even if they are safe.

I think most would rather have a race that can be bet on, and match races take all the fun out of that by having only two options at extremely short odds.

5% takeout. :ThmbUp:

[andtheyreoff]

Why is it a bad idea? Seems exciting to me.

I was pretty sure it was a bad idea when I first saw the thread. Now, I know for sure.

[Milkshaker]

I would love to see empirical data that supports/refutes whether match races are "unsafe."

My guess is this is a case in which the adverse memory of the Ruffian tragedy blurs the actual danger. This document from Albany Law School argues that might be so: http://www.albanylaw.edu/media/user/glc/racing_gaming/times__november_15__editorial.pdf

I recall there being a mild flurry of them back in the mid 1990s: Soviet Problem I believe was matched several times in turf sprints, there was a match between P Val and Julie Krone, and Suffolk Downs staged one to determine the winningest horse of the year (in terms of wins, not purse $$$) circa 1997.

To my logic, it would seem as if racing in a pack of 12+ horses is more dangerous than going head to head.

[letswastemoney]

To my logic, it would seem as if racing in a pack of 12+ horses is more dangerous than going head to head.In a pack of 12 horses, they aren't forced to go all out from the start.

In a match race, no matter if the horse's form is front runner or closer, that horse will be forced to gun, or at least run significantly faster in the initial furlong.

I've always though that marathons with a normal sized field are the easiest races for horses, because they can lope along the first half. Sprints and miles are more difficult because the entire field runs faster in each quarter.

In a match race, it's a pressured lead right from the start with little or no break.

[horses4courses]

I would love to see empirical data that supports/refutes whether match races are "unsafe."

My guess is this is a case in which the adverse memory of the Ruffian tragedy blurs the actual danger. This document from Albany Law School argues that might be so: http://www.albanylaw.edu/media/user/glc/racing_gaming/times__november_15__editorial.pdf

I recall there being a mild flurry of them back in the mid 1990s: Soviet Problem I believe was matched several times in turf sprints, there was a match between P Val and Julie Krone, and Suffolk Downs staged one to determine the winningest horse of the year (in terms of wins, not purse $$$) circa 1997.

To my logic, it would seem as if racing in a pack of 12+ horses is more dangerous than going head to head.

I agree.

I seem to recall another match in So Cal a few years back involving
Mike Smith and Chantal Sutherland. The jockey v jockey ones don't
count so much, though, because they were riding ordinary horses.

American dirt racing, imo, has an added difficulty
when finding a pair of horses to race each other.
You have to find those with similar ability and running styles.

For instance, a Rachel v Zenyatta match race would
have been a foregone conclusion on most dirt tracks.
Zenyatta simply did not have the natural speed to
keep up on most dirt surfaces. Add opposition into the
race, or run it on synthetic, and Z would win plenty of times.

It's a prime example of how different conditions can affect outcomes.

[stormreveler]

I seem to recall another match in So Cal a few years back involving Mike Smith and Chantal Sutherland.

They weren't wrestling.

[RacingFan1992]

The way horse racing is with tracks paying appearance for a horse to run in a race such as Parx did for California Chrome, it is only a matter of time before we have two fierce rivals beating the shit out of one another in the stretch with the owners licking their chops over a six figure appearance fee. What money does to people.